This daring PrEP video puts the sexy back in HIV prevention

  • metta

    Posts: 44465

    Jun 27, 2017 8:44 PM GMT
    This daring PrEP video puts the sexy back in HIV prevention


    https://www.queerty.com/sexy-prep-video-puts-sex-back-hiv-prevention-20170627
  • metta

    Posts: 44465

    Jun 27, 2017 8:45 PM GMT



  • metta

    Posts: 44465

    Jun 27, 2017 8:48 PM GMT
  • metta

    Posts: 44465

    Jun 27, 2017 8:53 PM GMT
  • metta

    Posts: 44465

    Jun 27, 2017 8:57 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 28, 2017 6:10 AM GMT
    metta said




    The proverbial saying "you can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig" applies here. I'm referring to how this guy justifies his reckless advocacy for normalising barebacking. This is not and I repeat not a harm reduction public health message, this is an attempt to shame people who dare to defy the get on Prep and let's all bareback advocates by getting men who are against condom use to explain things in a sanatised way to attempt to convince people that there is no down side to Prep and everybody should be on it. His explanation brings up memories of hearing racist comments made by people who think they can be excused by adding, " but no offence" and expecting that makes it ok. Prep is needed to a certain part of the population there is no doubt about it, but there is a very distinct push by the Prep lobby to tack BB sex on to the message in order to normalise it.

    We all know that some guys will BB no matter what anyone says but how does attempting to normalise this behaviour help in anyway toward reducing HIV transmission. Keep in mind their is direct mention of the taking of Prep meaning that taking Truvada equals certainty of protection from HIV and we all know that is false. When Prep (which is a sexual health prevention strategy not the actual medication) is provided for people who are already at risk due to refusal to take adequate measures to protect their sexual health (86-92% profficiency is the offical figure) when taking Prep near to or completely as prescribed, we are comparing that to people who have effectively 0% or very much close to it. When the population who is currently taking very few if any risks are encouraged or peer pressured into going onto Prep the risk is much greater as shown in the iPrex study which showed the real world proficiency of Prep is %41.

    If this strategy is trying to encourage those people who refuse to use condoms anyway which before Prep were much fewer im numbers, please tell me how it does this and more importantly can it be idepedantly quantified that this message is successfully engaging those persons in the most at risk populations. I have noticed the broadening of 'at risk sexually active' people broadened from the initial strategy. So my challenge to these people and their BB agenda is to stop making perceived 'sex rights' (really it is people who wanted to BB in the past but felt they missed out wanting to relive what they perceived they missed out on) and keep it to a sexual health promotion strategy. It's the very same mentality which leads to gay men, in particular disengaging in the first place from the gay community. No wonder it's so hard to engage that part of the population when gay men who have their heads firmly fixed on their own desires promote their own agenda by tacking it on to important and potentially revolutionary changes to the world that gay men (the most affected by HIV) live in both now and into the future. Once again own GOAL to the opposition, we kicked it in past our own goal keeper way to go.
  • Element1313

    Posts: 152

    Jun 28, 2017 7:51 PM GMT
    Great message; all gay men should be dependent on big Pharma.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 28, 2017 8:32 PM GMT
    Generic PreP is being evaluated by FDA. Bye bye Big Pharma. In the only study on the use of PreP by gay men relied on by the CDC, PreP provides 98.4% protection against positive seroconversion in anal sex.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2017 5:38 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidGeneric PreP is being evaluated by FDA. Bye bye Big Pharma. In the only study on the use of PreP by gay men relied on by the CDC, PreP provides 98.4% prohtection against positive seroconversion in anal sex.


    Where is that stat sourced from woodsman? The CDC says 92% other sites 86% and that's with a strict adherence to taking it as prescribed. The iPrex study led to the real world findings of 41% efficacy from that studies attempt to mimic real world conditions. People on trials are supervised and therefore agreeing to being monitored hence the low rates of seroconversion. If generic Prep comes into The community 41% efficacy will be repeated or near that because you then take away necessity to test by removing testing being tied to access to Prep. Drug resistant HIV will soon follow if unsupervised but presumably subsidised Generic Prep is allowed on the market and taken at the users own risk as its obvious if I were Gillead I wouldn't fund services if I am making far less money , only an idiot can't see that is the inevitable path of supplying generic Prep and promoting it to the many in the majority. This would be funny (not to taunt but coz it so silly and going against all the evidence) if it wasn't something so serious that any sexually active gay men will eventually have to encounter in their own lives.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2017 5:50 AM GMT
    Hey Sydney: I could not find the RJ thread where the CDC hyperlink was cited. There were several studies involving different populations but only one study involving about 7000 gay men and that study's conclusion that about 60 men were seropositive out of about 7000 after taking PreP continuously while they were having unprotected anal intercourse lead to the protective rate of about 98.4%.
  • 24hourguy

    Posts: 476

    Jun 29, 2017 4:33 PM GMT
    if only they looked like that
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2017 5:09 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidHey Sydney: I could not find the RJ thread where the CDC hyperlink was cited. There were several studies involving different populations but only one study involving about 7000 gay men and that study's conclusion that about 60 men were seropositive out of about 7000 after taking PreP continuously while they were having unprotected anal intercourse lead to the protective rate of about 98.4%.


    A simple google search for the CDC and their offical information page for Prep is below
    Submit

    Woodsman since your so sure of those figures here is the link, pls site your source, I am sceptical of that information you provided. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv

    For those interested in what the CDC actually says the link

    https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/prep/index.html

    Please note the following for those who don't want to follow the link below is a direct copy and paste of their most current advice and information regarding taking HIV treatment drugs as prevention from HIV transmission. The date showing its the most current available and as you will see there is no mention of any study with 98% proficiency. You may have got it mixed up with studies on Undetectable viral loads (UVL) in Serodiscordant couples possibly which is an honest mistake yet doesn't confirm your assertion of Prep somehow being much more proficient than it is, or historically ever been formally advised to be.

    CDC A-Z INDEX
    HIV/AIDS

    HIV/AIDS
    HIV Basics
    HIV by Groupexpand
    HIV Risk and Preventioncollapse
    HIV Risk and Prevention Estimatesexpand
    Oral Sex
    Anal Sex
    Vaginal Sex
    Substance Use
    Injection Drug Useexpand
    Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP)
    Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP)
    HIV Treatment as Prevention
    Condoms
    HIV in the Workplace
    HIV Testingexpand
    Researchexpand
    Policy and Lawexpand
    Program Resourcesexpand
    HIV Funding and Budgetexpand
    HIV Guidelinesexpand
    Training and Conferencesexpand
    Statistics Centerexpand
    Resource Libraryexpand
    About the Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention
    VIH En EspaƱol
    SearchGet Tested
    Find an HIV testing site near you.

    Enter ZIP code or city

    Follow HIV/AIDS

    CDC HIV
    CDC HIV/AIDS
    See RSS | Subscribe to RSS
    Get Email Updates on HIV
    Syndicated Content
    Website Feedback
    HIV/AIDSHIV Risk and Prevention
    Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP)
    Recommend on Facebook Tweet Share
    Photo of HIV medication Pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, is a way for people who do not have HIV but who are at substantial risk of getting it to prevent HIV infection by taking a pill every day. The pill (brand name Truvada) contains two medicines (tenofovir and emtricitabine) that are used in combination with other medicines to treat HIV. When someone is exposed to HIV through sex or injection drug use, these medicines can work to keep the virus from establishing a permanent infection.

    When taken consistently, PrEP has been shown to reduce the risk of HIV infection in people who are at high risk by up to 92%. PrEP is much less effective if it is not taken consistently.

    PrEP is a powerful HIV prevention tool and can be combined with condoms and other prevention methods to provide even greater protection than when used alone. But people who use PrEP must commit to taking the drug every day and seeing their health care provider for follow-up every 3 months.

    Expand All expand allCollapse All collapse all
    Resources for Consumersexpand
    Resources for Providersexpand
    Additional PrEP Resources

    Press Release: New guidelines recommend daily HIV prevention pill for those at substantial risk
    Top of Page

    File Formats Help:

    How do I view different file formats (PDF, DOC, PPT, MPEG) on this site?
    Adobe PDF file
    Page last reviewed: September 19, 2016
    Page last updated: April 17, 2017
    Content source: Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, Sexual Transmitted Diseases and Tuberculosis Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2017 5:32 PM GMT
    The 92% you quoted is a figure connected with a generalized statistical population of "those people who are at high risk" but not specifically to gay men having anal sex.

    Am unable to find the study so will withdraw my conclusion. But the study that you cited regarding the 92% figure actually says as follows:

    "In the FTC-TDF group, among subjects with a detectable study-drug level, as compared with those without a detectable level, the odds of HIV infection were lower by a factor of 12.9 (95% CI, 1.7 to 99.3 ; P<0.001), corresponding to s relative reduction in HIV risk of 92% (95% CI, 40 to 99; P<0.001). After adjustment for reported unprotected anal intercourse, the relative risk reduction was 95% (95% CI, 70 to 99; P<0.001). "

    www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1011205
  • Element1313

    Posts: 152

    Jun 29, 2017 10:04 PM GMT
    And 15 years later you die of multiple organ failure. Do you really think drugs that are able to combat AIDS don't adversely affect the body? Read Gilead's disclaimer on their web site. It is right up front. It's a dangerous drug not for recreational use.



    woodsmen

    said
    Generic PreP is being evaluated by FDA. Bye bye Big Pharma. In the only study on the use of PreP by gay men relied on by the CDC, PreP provides 98.4% protection against positive seroconversion in anal sex.
  • Element1313

    Posts: 152

    Jun 29, 2017 10:08 PM GMT
    So it's ok for str8 guys to have 20
    Illegitimate kids cus condoms are just so bothersome.

    metta said
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 30, 2017 3:01 AM GMT
    Element1313 saidSo it's ok for str8 guys to have 20
    Illegitimate kids cus condoms are just so bothersome.

    metta said


    Good point. All this is a Big Pharma ad. You also can try getting tested for HIV with your partner and if you're both negative you can just have unprotected, clean, monogamous sex, but that of course requires you to not be filthy cumbucket who fucks 40 guys a month which is whats promoted in 90% of all gay culture.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2017 6:09 AM GMT
    Element1313 said.

    metta said


    I'm going to go against my natural inclination to point out the obvious lack of insight your comment "So it's ok for str8 guys to have 20 Illegitimate kids cus condoms are just so bothersome" makes about the attitude of many Prep users and respond with some scientific facts. Gay men are statistically the most affected by HIV and always will be at higher risk because of the following medical reasons that no equality demands can ever change.
    1. Receptive Anal Sex is practiced most frequently by Gay men and the act while very natural to many, involves the significantly higher risk of HIV transmission because the biology of the human male anus does not self lubricate, is prone to tearing of which provides the most direct route for viral infections to enter the blood stream. The Female vagina does self lubricate and is able to accomodate much greater levels of penis insertion related pressure on its inner walls due to the vagina being designed for child birth which would otherwise cause massive internal bleeding ar every child birth.
    2. Many Gay men vary in their number of sexual partner s however their have been many studies providing evidence that a majority of Gay men have many more sexual partners than do heterosexual men.
    3. Gay men in significant numbers, engage in Rough sex and sex with men who's penis size is far above the average 7 inches or more and engaging in it within a culture which values indulgence in high risk sexual acts & re-enforce of pleasure oriented sexuality without any consideration for the potnetial consequences.
    4. HIV is more likely to be transmitted to othesrs when persons engaging in high risk sexual behaviour do not engage with medical practitioners who can ensure that anyone who recieves the most appropriate medical treatment to reduce or eliminate risk of a newly infected person, infecting others due mainly to their limited motivation to recognise the importance of engagement with Gay friendly Sexual health services
    5. Many Gay men see the above as merely a barrier to engaging in more powerful and intense pleasure of which they derive from acts considered more 'tabboo' with some derived of physiological & and psychological pleasure. If achieving an ever increasingly difficult to match sexual high leads to many gay men deciding to act on impulse and engage in risky sexual act is hampering the maximsing of pleasure.
    6. A culture that encourages hedonism and the status of 'sexual concurre which manifests in addiction through substance missuse and mental health issues developing which lead to poor decisions making during the heat of the moment when sexual tension from attraction is present. A culture that does not provide room to challenge self destructive social patterns will inevitably lead to significant levels on entrenched stagnation in the development of the human adult psychie.

    Of course some of these things apply to heterosexual woman and men, but not on the same scale of frequency. Heterosexual men may be as motivated to have as much sex as possible ,as their advances require the interaction/consent of woman, who have been socialised to be far less permiscuous than men, effectively meaning less sexual partners on average for Heterosexual men compared to Homosexual men.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2017 1:44 PM GMT
    One question that any gay man must ask is whether he would have sex with another man who is not on PreP.

    The above RJers advocate using condoms but condoms are less than 100% effective.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2017 6:19 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]woodsmen said[/cite]One question that any gay man must ask is whether he would have sex with another man who is not on PreP.

    The above RJers advocate using condoms but condoms are less than 100%[aa/quote]

    I am finding myself to have become too concerned with Aquiring STI's by an increasing number of BB only advocates who are taking Prep and now use it as a code to communicate online that they are seeking BB sexual encounters. I have thought from the beginning if Prep became mainstreamed through a mass commimuutv roll out it would endanger progress already made

    Yes 98% protection is less than 100%, very observant. Fact is that Prep is not marketed to those who are mainly without protection method or employ none. For them using Prep correctly and on the proviso that there dosing of Prep is monitored and 3 monthly testing carried out at any point on the spectrum between 41% (iPrex study figure up to 92% the highest accepted protection level rating currently advocated by reputable sexual health agencies, is better than the lower figure those gay men have without Prep. There have been many attempts by persons some well meaning trying to reduce perceived stigma and of course a vocal group of BB sex advocates, have stated created a 'self fulfilling' prophecy by comparing statistics on condom proficiency when not used correctly and consistantly of which has eroded confidence in condoms and led some many who had greater levels of protection and are ether motivated by excessive fear mungerijg based on study reports which compare Prep use its most effective, to condom use when utilising through the prism of sporadic or inconsistent use.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2017 7:00 PM GMT
    According to World Health Organization:

    "According to a 2000 report by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), consistent use of latex condoms reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85% relative to risk when unprotected"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2017 6:44 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidAccording to World Health Organization:

    "According to a 2000 report by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), consistent use of latex condoms reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85% relative to risk when unprotected"
    ewee

    That I will look up but I suspect it looses 13% of rating to allow for those who admit to using condoms less. Oddly enough prior to 2012 there seemed to be an over reporting of condom use and since then has flipped to under reporting. The current fettish of many gay men to fellow the 2017 redefined meaning of intimacy which apparently now mean condomless Sex aka Barebacking. This trend has led to people giving researchers who still base their condom usage stats on questionable statistical methods such as questionairres at Gay events knowing it is likely to reflect commonly held belief instead of a tally of individual actually actions. If you don't believe me I will explain, I did stats and survey compiling at University
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2017 12:33 PM GMT
    Too many words. Here is the bottom line. Condoms provide 85% protection against HIV. PreP provides 95% HIV protection in anal sex.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2017 3:25 AM GMT
    Good grief. First time back on here in a while and still the only thread that's active is this tired PrEP thread where everyone has an obvious agenda. Maybe if people weren't so obsessed with the sex other people were getting, they'd get more themselves. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2017 4:07 AM GMT
    Whatever the agenda is, I think each gay man before having anal sex need to ask this first question. Am I a top or a bottom?

    If the answer is a bottom, you can't wear a condom. So the protection you can control is whether to take PreP. PreP will be there for you if condom breaks, if you share any type of fluid with the top including saliva of the mouth or mucous of the anal rings through rimming.

    If you are a top, the question is not just whether you wear a condom but if you have a choice between two bottoms, one taken PreP and one not, which would you to pick to have sex? Because there is a 95% probability that the bottom taking PreP may not have HIV, he is probable safer to have sex with than the one not.

    The additional question for the top is whether you should also taken PreP. The answer is Yes because if the condom breaks you will have the additional protection of PreP. Or if your sexual activities include sharing of any fluid with the bottom. Or if you cannot entirely trust whether the bottom is HIV free, whether he actually takes PreP.

    So the bottom line is both top and bottom should take PreP, if your health and doctor agree, whether or not you will engage in unprotected anal sex.

    And yes I believe that given PreP, it is irresponsible for condom advocates to push condom only sex which provides only 85% protection against HIV versus 95% protectiom of PreP.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 06, 2017 11:00 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidWhatever the agenda is, I think each gay man before having anal sex need to ask this first question. Am I a top or a bottom?

    If the answer is a bottom, you can't wear a condom. So the protection you can control is whether to take PreP. PreP will be there for you if condom breaks, if you share any type of fluid with the top including saliva of the mouth or mucous of the anal rings through rimming.

    If you are a top, the question is not just whether you wear a condom but if you have a choice between two bottoms, one taken PreP and one not, which would you to pick to have sex? Because there is a 95% probability that the bottom taking PreP may not have HIV, he is probable safer to have sex with than the one not.

    The additional question for the top is whether you should also taken PreP. The answer is Yes because if the condom breaks you will have the additional protection of PreP. Or if your sexual activities include sharing of any fluid with the bottom. Or if you cannot entirely trust whether the bottom is HIV free, whether he actually takes PreP.

    So the bottom line is both top and bottom should take PreP, if your health and doctor agree, whether or not you will engage in unprotected anal sex.

    And yes I believe that given PreP, it is irresponsible for condom advocates to push condom only sex which provides only 85% protection against HIV versus 95% protectiom of PreP.


    Dude your comparing stats you made up as both incorrect and very misleading. But seeing you post blantent BS, go lick big pharma' she crack, everything you posted sounds like you do. The only ones pushing for their to be one treatment option only is Prep pushers who believe BB is a right above all else and Prep makes people who think that goof for everyone. Condoms for casual sex used correctly is 98% protective and 92% for Prep. Really strange how Prep is now being pushed as the wonder drug for every a Gay man. I personally don't advocate one over the other they're are a range of options and not all are about taking liver function reducing HIV medication for low risk persons some of who lose 6% protection for HIV if switching and 100% less protection from any other STI.

    For the record, I am way less interested in sleeping with guys these days especially Prep takers as it code for BB casual sex and often a request to 'dump a load in them, so why would I want to choose a prep guy who will give me an STI and do remember verified Prep users who have seroconverted so don't be so smug buddy